Democratic-generated complaints notwithstanding, there was nothing wrong with George W. Bush highlighting his leadership in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks as he campaigned for reelection. He was reminding us of how he had handled his job, uniting the nation at a challenging time. And since he was asking us to keep him on for another term, it was entirely appropriate to provide a record of his accomplishment.

Similarly, there is nothing wrong with Obama reminding us under his watch, Navy SEALs got Osama bin Laden. We got it done under his watch. He has every right to take credit for it.

He may be, as Glenn quipped earlier today, overplaying it a bit. And to borrow the metaphor the blogmeister used, the man who scores the touchdown has every right to spike the ball to celebrate his score. Only he should also acknowledge the man who threw the pass as well as the coach — as well as the other members of the team — who helped him into scoring position. In other words, Obama may have been in position to score the kill, but he did it as part of a team.

And that team didn’t just include Democrats. Under Mr. Obama’s Republican predecessor, the team (to stay with the metaphor) moved the ball down the field [See UPDATE below]. The team didn’t score points against Republicans, but against enemies of the United States, enemies shared by both parties.

In other words, it’s one thing to campaign on his own accomplishment, quite another to suggest your opponent wouldn’t have done the same thing. As 2010 CPAC blogger of the year Ed Morrissey puts it:

Obama would be on firm ground to highlight that victory in the war on terror, as he does in his tedious “Forward” campaign video. Implying that Romney would have let Osama bin Laden go under those circumstances is, as [Arianna] Huffington says, despicable.

“I don’t think there should be an ad about that,” Huffington said Monday on “CBS This Morning.” “I think it’s one thing to celebrate the fact that they did such a great job (with television specials). All that is perfectly legitimate. But to turn it into a campaign ad is one of the most despicable things you can do.”

. . . .

“So in a campaign, aren’t you supposed to tout your accomplishments of what you’ve done,” Gayle King asked.

Huffington replied, “That’s not just what the ad does. What the ad does is questions. … (The ad) quotes a snippet from Romney and uses that to imply that Romney would not has been as decisive. There’s no way to know whether Romney would have been as decisive. To actually speculate that he wouldn’t be is, to me, not the way to run a campaign, on either side.”

In the fight against Al Qaeda, Mr. Obama should remember that Mr. Romney is on the same team as he.

Jose Rodriguez is a 31-year veteran of the CIA. During the post-9/11 years, he served as chief of the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center and later as head of the National Clandestine Service.

In today’s Washington Post, Rodriguez offers two useful reminders: (1) our high-fiving president probably would not have had the opportunity to take out Osama bin Laden last year but for “extraordinary work during the George W. Bush administration” and (2) Obama opposed key elements of that work.

“In short,” writes Jennifer Rubin, commenting on the same piece in the Post . . .

“the decision” was actually only the last link in the decision-making chain, including the decision to use EITs and black sites, that led to bin Laden’s death. Obama distorts how the intelligence community works, by portraying this as just him and the SEALs. In sum, Obama grabs too much credit, exaggerating his own role and concealing the work of others whose efforts he opposed at the time.

28 Comments

We got it done under his watch. He has every right to take credit for it.

Yup. And for the record, let’s review how smoothly Obama took that credit:

“I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority . . . even as I continued our broader effort. . . . Then, after years of painstaking work by my intelligence community I was briefed . . . I met repeatedly with my national security team . . . And finally last week I determined that I had enough intelligence to take action. . . . Today, at my direction . . .”

A recently disclosed memorandum from then-CIA Director Leon Panetta shows that the president’s celebrated derring-do in authorizing the operation included a responsibility-escape clause: “The timing, operational decision making and control are in Admiral McRaven’s hands. The approval is provided on the risk profile presented to the President. Any additional risks are to be brought back to the President for his consideration. The direction is to go in and get bin Laden and if he is not there, to get out.”

[…]

…the president does not seem to have addressed at all the possibility of seizing material with intelligence value—which may explain his disclosure immediately following the event not only that bin Laden was killed, but also that a valuable trove of intelligence had been seized, including even the location of al Qaeda safe-houses. That disclosure infuriated the intelligence community because it squandered the opportunity to exploit the intelligence that was the subject of the boast….

Way to go, Bammy. You were in such a hurry to brag, that your timing screwed over the intelligence team.

Finally, may I say that I ‘love’ how Obama’s bragging on this:
1) implicitly validates the entire Bush security position (including waterboarding, which obtained important pieces of the early intelligence chain, like info on Osama’s couriers);
2) undercuts everything the Left has ever tried to teach evil Amerikkka about the evils of governmentally-sponsored, extra-legal assassinations; and
3) changes the subject to one that even Independents know the Democrats are darn weak on: namely, defense and foreign policy, including the GWOT.

President “I, Me, My” Obama disproportionally takes credit? Color me surprised, NOT! This is yet another ploy like the “war on women” and the”Romney made his poor dog ride on the roof of his car” that is going to backfire. Plus his jumping in on the side of his “people” again without all the facts in the Martin/Zimmerman case. It is almost like he knows he can’t run on his record so he keeps throwing shiny objects up in the air as a distraction, “oh look bright shiny object!” unfortunately for him, their is no way to escape him record. I am looking “forward” to the debates!

Anyone notice that his new slogan “forward” is the command given by a BLIND person to have is guide DOG lead him “FORWARD” thus “LEADING FROM BEHIND!” LOL!

Yeah, Obama does deserve some credit. Regardless of what anyone says, sending US special forces personnel into a foreign nation just 30 miles from their capital with super secret black ups helicopters without even informing said foreign government, even to get OBL, is a hard call. If something went wrong, there’s no way it would have been kept quiet.

But, Obama isn’t really spiking the ball at this point: he’s dancing on a riser which would get a yellow flag thrown.